Why Trust This Analysis
This article is part of our ongoing no-fault coverage, with 271 published articles analyzing no-fault issues across New York State. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum brings 24+ years of hands-on experience to this analysis, drawing from his work on more than 1,000 appeals, over 100,000 no-fault cases, and recovery of over $100 million for clients throughout Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and the Bronx. For personalized legal advice about how these principles apply to your specific situation, contact our Long Island office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
The intersection of federal constitutional law and New York no-fault insurance litigation creates complex jurisdictional questions, particularly when out-of-state government entities become involved in personal injury cases. The Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution generally protects states from being sued in federal court by private parties, but this immunity can be waived under certain circumstances.
In Belfand v Petosa, the First Department Appellate Division addressed whether New Jersey Transit could invoke Eleventh Amendment immunity to avoid litigation in New York courts. This case highlights the ongoing tension between state sovereign immunity protections and the practical realities of interstate commerce and transportation. The decision demonstrates how procedural missteps can result in the waiver of significant constitutional protections, particularly when government entities fail to properly preserve their defenses in litigation involving insurance fraud or related no-fault matters.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Belfand v Petosa, 2021 NY Slip Op 03522 (1st Dept. 2021)
Free Consultation · No Fee Unless We Win
Does this apply to your situation?
Every case is different. Get a free, confidential case review from an experienced attorney who can tell you exactly where you stand.
I follow certain US Supreme Court cases, because I always like to see how far the Court veers from constitutional precedent that I learned quite awhile ago in law school. This Eleventh Amendment jurisprudence does not seem to be correct. If NJ Transit comes to NY and acts inappropriately, why should they not be called to task in a New York Court? that was the lesson we learned in law school.
Of course, strare decsis is something the Roberts Court honors in the breach. When it is convenient, it is cited. When it is inconvenient, they throw it out. Oh and try bringing a lawsuit in New Jersey under the TCA. The threshold on those cases is worse than the standard New Jersey permanency threshold.
But in the end, the Court held NJ Transit waived its 11th Amendment defense. That is great but I am sure since 2019, they have moved for dismissal or preserved the defense.
Key Takeaway
The First Department ruled that NJ Transit waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity defense by failing to properly preserve it during litigation. This decision allows injured parties to pursue claims against the transit authority in New York courts, though future cases may see more careful preservation of constitutional defenses by government entities.
Related Articles
Legal Context
Why This Matters for Your Case
New York's no-fault insurance system, established under Insurance Law Article 51, is one of the most complex insurance frameworks in the country. Every motorist must carry Personal Injury Protection coverage that pays medical expenses and lost wages regardless of fault, up to $50,000 per person.
But insurers routinely deny valid claims using peer reviews, EUO scheduling tactics, fee schedule reductions, and coverage defenses. The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum has handled over 100,000 no-fault cases since 2002 — from initial claim submissions through arbitration before the American Arbitration Association, trials in Civil Court and Supreme Court, and appeals to the Appellate Term and Appellate Division. Jason Tenenbaum is one of the few attorneys in the state who both writes his own appellate briefs and tries his own cases.
His 2,353+ published legal articles on no-fault practice are cited by attorneys throughout New York. Whether you are dealing with a medical necessity denial, an EUO no-show defense, a fee schedule dispute, or a coverage question, this article provides the kind of detailed case-law analysis that helps practitioners and claimants understand exactly where the law stands.
About This Topic
New York No-Fault Insurance Law
New York's no-fault insurance system requires every driver to carry Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage that pays medical expenses and lost wages regardless of who caused the accident. But insurers routinely deny, delay, and underpay valid claims — using peer reviews, IME no-shows, and fee schedule defenses to avoid paying providers and injured claimants. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has litigated thousands of no-fault arbitrations and court cases since 2002.
271 published articles in No-Fault
Keep Reading
More No-Fault Analysis
Car Accident Recorded Statement in New York: Should You Give One?
The at-fault driver's adjuster wants a recorded statement within days of a New York car accident — and that call is designed to weaken your case.
Apr 5, 2026
Who Pays Car Accident Medical Bills in New York? A Step-by-Step Guide
New York no-fault PIP, primary health insurance, Medicaid/Medicare, and litigation liens — the full payment ladder for car-accident medical bills.
Apr 5, 2026
Another no-fault physician commits insurance fraud
Doctor convicted of insurance fraud for falsifying no-fault C-4 forms, showing patient as disabled when they were working.
Mar 21, 2012
Another priority of payment?
Understanding NY no-fault priority of payment rules and how they affect your medical bills. Expert legal analysis. Call 516-750-0595 for consultation.
Jun 25, 2023
Was it fraudulent billing?
Florida court examines whether billing code errors constitute fraudulent billing under no-fault insurance law, comparing to New York regulatory standards.
Oct 8, 2021
Texting your friend who kills someone: Are you liable?
Court rules texting someone who kills in car accident doesn't create liability. Remote senders lack control over drivers unlike passengers in vehicle.
May 4, 2018Was this article helpful?
Disclaimer: This article is published by the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this content. The legal principles discussed may not apply to your specific situation, and the law may have changed since this article was last updated.
New York law varies by jurisdiction — court decisions in one Appellate Division department may not be followed in another, and local court rules in Nassau County Supreme Court differ from those in Suffolk County Supreme Court, Kings County Civil Court, or Queens County Supreme Court. The Appellate Division, Second Department (which covers Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island) and the Appellate Term (which hears appeals from lower courts) each have distinct procedural requirements and precedents that affect litigation strategy.
If you need legal help with a no-fault matter, contact our office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation. We serve clients throughout Long Island (Huntington, Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton), Nassau County (Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa), Suffolk County (Hauppauge, Deer Park, Bay Shore, Central Islip, Patchogue, Brentwood), Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, Staten Island, and Westchester County. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
